How secure are corporate jobs - really

[cvoz]

In an earlier post someone made this comment which got me thinking:

"Past 50, you probably don't have to worry about being laid off in less than dire circumstances where you currently are. You may have to expect a much higher likelihood of being laid off at a new company where you won't have much time in and may not be able to find another by that age. Risks only rise with age."

I've only worked in a big corporation for the past 7 years (small companies prior). the Company I'm with now is $10B and growing (through aquisitions) we end up competing against ourselves as we continue to aquire more companies.

What are your experiences in large corporations?

[bbbamI]

Too many fingers in the pie and miles of red tape.

There is risk to everyone. Times are changing.

[Delawaredave5]

My experiece is that one's "layoff potential" is same at large and small companies.

Small companies are more "whimisical" - I've seen good people get laid off because owner didn't like them or like how they dress.

However big companies have "wrong place at the wrong time" risks - I've seen great performers get let go because they were in the wrong job at the wrong time.

Biggest "defense" is to keep yourself marketable - internally and externally. Pretty obvoius stuff: develop good contacts, education credentials, broad skills base, etc

[Milton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delawaredave5 Biggest "defense" is to keep yourself marketable - internally and externally. Pretty obvoius stuff: develop good contacts, education credentials, broad skills base, etc

Sounds like a lot of w*rk. A better 'defence' might be to LBYM and achieve FIRE.

[Marquette]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Milton Sounds like a lot of w*rk. A better 'defence' might be to LBYM and achieve FIRE.

Plenty of years between starting a job and that point though

[Spanky]

Quote:

What are your experiences in large corporations?

- Hierarchy (too many chiefs (VPs) and not enough people to do actual work.
- Paperwork and rigorous procedures and policy.
- Politics are rampant (not that small companies are any less).
- Cross-functional influence or B.S. is the key to climb the ladder.
- Pay and benefits are usually better than those of small companies.
- Justifications are usually required to get rid of people.

[BunsGettingFirm]

I do second DelawareDave's observation that small companies can be run like little kingdoms because there is no check and balance. In large companies, the rules to get rid of people are more strict. You can't fire somebody simply because you don't like them.

However, to look for job security is kind of a waste of time exercise because there is no such thing.

[Rustward]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BunsGettingFirm I do second DelawareDave's observation that small companies can be run like little kingdoms because there is no check and balance. In large companies, the rules to get rid of people are more strict. You can't fire somebody simply because you don't like them. However, to look for job security is kind of a waste of time exercise because there is no such thing.

Both Dave and Buns have it right. Things are much more subjective in small companies. Your future might ride on what one person thinks ... and that one person might not even be qualified to judge your "worthiness", yet he is in a position to do so anyway.

There is very little security anywhere these days. Larger companies tend to have better benefits while you are there, and better separation packages when they must purge you. Small companies ... anything goes ... I like the "little kingdom" description.

[W2R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rustward There is very little security anywhere these days. Larger companies tend to have better benefits while you are there, and better separation packages when they must purge you. Small companies ... anything goes ... I like the "little kingdom" description.

In my view, it's especially sad when those who are loyal to their large or small company don't get the same degree of loyalty in return. I guess that kind of employer-employee relationship has been relegated to our distant past.

Often one hears about the aging federal work force. But it only makes sense, when outside companies provide such little job security for those over 50. Some people move into federal employment for the job security, which is comparatively high after the probationary period. Federal employment has its negative aspects, but job security is usually pretty decent.

[Finance Dave]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rustward There is very little security anywhere these days.

I respectfully disagree. I think the security today comes from ME. It's based on my work ethic, my ability to add value to the company, my desire to learn (in the past 15 years I've obtained an engineering degree, an MBA, a CMA (certified management accountant), and become Six Sigma certified.), and so on. Given the relatively low unemployment rate today of around 4.5%, companies really want to keep their good workers, so they are relatively secure.

There are always exceptions, such as when the general economy goes into recession or downturn and you are in a "volume-dependent" position...then sometimes companies must let people go.

I work for a large company with 35,000 employees. We have "forced ranking". Each employee is evaluated on a scale and "ranked" against his/her peers. The goal is to put 10% of the employees into a "top tier", those are the ones who get the large raises and promotions. Then they put 80% into a "middle tier", and those folks get raises about equal to cost of living, and still get promotions, but on a more "spread out" time table based on their abilities/desires. Then they put 10% in a "bottom tier". Those 10% are put on "work improvement" plans, and they must meet with their managers quarterly to discuss. If you are rated in this bottom tier two years in a row, then the company MIGHT let you go if they need to reduce staff headcounts.

Although there are things I hate about this system (It causes rivalry between peers), the one good thing is that being fired for performance (as opposed to being fired for doing something illegal) is never a surprise...you know at least a year in advance that you are "at risk", and you have the opportunity to improve.

I've worked for my company for 20 years, and I've never once said "Gee, that guy was a great employee and they fired him". More likely I've said things like "I'm glad they got rid of him, he was lazy and always trying to push work onto others, never fixed any problems, and didn't have any initiative."

Dave

[lsbcal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finance Dave I respectfully disagree. I think the security today comes from ME. It's based on my work ethic, my ability to add value to the company, my desire to learn (in the past 15 years I've obtained an engineering degree, an MBA, a CMA (certified management accountant), and become Six Sigma certified.), and so on.

For yourself this is definitely a good attitude in order to keep competitive in the marketplace. You will probably be among the last to be layed off if times get very rough.

Quote:

I've worked for my company for 20 years, and I've never once said "Gee, that guy was a great employee and they fired him". More likely I've said things like "I'm glad they got rid of him, he was lazy and always trying to push work onto others, never fixed any problems, and didn't have any initiative."

Typical hard ass attitude and makes me angry . I don't usually see red when reading a post. Well there might be a few sloths in the workplace but all in all people want to perform given a chance. You've just worked in your company for the right 20 years. I worked for a large company for 30 years and during the dot-com bust they layed off around 50% of the people. We had a ranking system too. That didn't stop them from laying off very high ranking people who were in the wrong units at the wrong time. I hope you're not the type of guy who sees their layed off collegues outside of work and looks the other way. You need to develop some compassion.

[kcowan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lsbcal I hope you're not the type of guy who sees their layed off collegues outside of work and looks the other way. You need to develop some compassion.

I did my share of corporate 'cleansing' and I would say that very few of the people let go were incapable of good work. Most were just caught in the wrong job. Most also used the transition to get into the right job. So everybody won.

(There were, however 2 suicides... but not from my list.)

[Finance Dave]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lsbcal For yourself this is definitely a good attitude in order to keep competitive in the marketplace. You will probably be among the last to be layed off if times get very rough. Typical hard ass attitude and makes me angry . I don't usually see red when reading a post. Well there might be a few sloths in the workplace but all in all people want to perform given a chance. You've just worked in your company for the right 20 years. I worked for a large company for 30 years and during the dot-com bust they layed off around 50% of the people. We had a ranking system too. That didn't stop them from laying off very high ranking people who were in the wrong units at the wrong time. I hope you're not the type of guy who sees their layed off collegues outside of work and looks the other way. You need to develop some compassion.

Isbcal, I did not mean to offend you or anyone, I was simply stating what I've seen in my company. I work with degreed professionals only...perhaps others work with production employees...which is a completely different story (they may be laid off REGARDLESS of how hard/smart they work).

As for whether I look the other way when I see them outside of work, it depends. If it's a person I like/admire, or someone who I think got the bad end of the deal, then I approach them and express my compassion for them, even offering contact names or to act as a reference so they can find another job. However, that has rarely been the case. Most of the people I've seen let go are ones who brought it upon themselves by turning down assignments at work, coming in late and leaving early, taking too many breaks during the day, turning in assignments that are late and sloppy, and other such things. I don't feel compassion for people who have control, but choose not to exercise it. If you think that makes me a "hard ass", then I guess I am. I call it accountability.

Dave

[BunsGettingFirm]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finance Dave I respectfully disagree. I think the security today comes from ME. It's based on my work ethic, my ability to add value to the company, my desire to learn (in the past 15 years I've obtained an engineering degree, an MBA, a CMA (certified management accountant), and become Six Sigma certified.), and so on. Given the relatively low unemployment rate today of around 4.5%, companies really want to keep their good workers, so they are relatively secure. There are always exceptions, such as when the general economy goes into recession or downturn and you are in a "volume-dependent" position...then sometimes companies must let people go. I work for a large company with 35,000 employees. We have "forced ranking". Each employee is evaluated on a scale and "ranked" against his/her peers. The goal is to put 10% of the employees into a "top tier", those are the ones who get the large raises and promotions. Then they put 80% into a "middle tier", and those folks get raises about equal to cost of living, and still get promotions, but on a more "spread out" time table based on their abilities/desires. Then they put 10% in a "bottom tier". Those 10% are put on "work improvement" plans, and they must meet with their managers quarterly to discuss. If you are rated in this bottom tier two years in a row, then the company MIGHT let you go if they need to reduce staff headcounts. Although there are things I hate about this system (It causes rivalry between peers), the one good thing is that being fired for performance (as opposed to being fired for doing something illegal) is never a surprise...you know at least a year in advance that you are "at risk", and you have the opportunity to improve. I've worked for my company for 20 years, and I've never once said "Gee, that guy was a great employee and they fired him". More likely I've said things like "I'm glad they got rid of him, he was lazy and always trying to push work onto others, never fixed any problems, and didn't have any initiative." Dave

Dave, I think you'll find that this board is filled with people with graduate degrees and professional certifications of the highest difficulty. Even so, most of us have seen enough to know that competency is necessary but not sufficient to ensure continued employment.

You may be right in that there is some rhyme and reason to who gets fired. That may actually be a good thing because it shows that the universe does have some rules. However, I have seen plenty of FOBs (friends of the boss) do little, strut around, create unnecessary and counterproductive chaos, and still remain employed. Trust me, no matter how good you are or how many black belts you have (in Six Sigma or in one of the martial arts), you cross one of the FOBs even if unintentionally, you're done.

[Alan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BunsGettingFirm Dave, I think you'll find that this board is filled with people with graduate degrees and professional certifications of the highest difficulty. Even so, most of us have seen enough to know that competency is necessary but not sufficient to ensure continued employment. You may be right in that there is some rhyme and reason to who gets fired. That may actually be a good thing because it shows that the universe does have some rules. However, I have seen plenty of FOBs (friends of the boss) do little, strut around, create unnecessary and counterproductive chaos, and still remain employed. Trust me, no matter how good you are or how many black belts you have (in Six Sigma or in one of the martial arts), you cross one of the FOBs even if unintentionally, you're done.

I fully agree. I've been with the same large company 29 years, been a senior managerfor the last 18 years and seen many good, very competant, folks get laid off or fired because on incompetent managers who happen to be FOBs. I always took jobs at manufacturing sites where jobs tended to be more secure for competent folks. 4 years ago I was asked to move to Corporate in Houston during yet another company restructing by a Director in England that I had know for years and repected highly. I was very successful in everything they gave me to do - establishing 3 global teams of managers, and working on mergers and aquisitions. However, in the new organization, my Director's face and management style did not fit so only lasted 14 months. Another local Director who I worked closely with and quickly got to respect and rely on for advice lasted only 8 months. They brought in a new Director and I worked for him for 14 months - he was really excellent and extremely effective. However his face didn't fit either and he got laid off last summer. That's when I decided I wanted out of that environment.

As I say I have tons of all the experience the company wants plus I don't have a political bone in my body so there were plenty of offers. I chose a job back at the company's largest site where I'd spent 15 years. The great reception I've received has been almost over whelming. (still can't wait to RE of course )

[Milton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BunsGettingFirm Dave, I think you'll find that this board is filled with people with graduate degrees and professional certifications of the highest difficulty. Even so, most of us have seen enough to know that competency is necessary but not sufficient to ensure continued employment. You may be right in that there is some rhyme and reason to who gets fired. That may actually be a good thing because it shows that the universe does have some rules. However, I have seen plenty of FOBs (friends of the boss) do little, strut around, create unnecessary and counterproductive chaos, and still remain employed. Trust me, no matter how good you are or how many black belts you have (in Six Sigma or in one of the martial arts), you cross one of the FOBs even if unintentionally, you're done.

Yep, very true.

Believing in yourself, and working hard to maintain/improve your qualifications and abilities, are certainly worthwhile; but they are not guarantees of job security.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FinanceDave I think the security today comes from ME. It's based on my work ethic, my ability to add value to the company, my desire to learn, and so on.

The downside to buying into the 'I alone am responsible for my job security' crap trap is that if (or more likely, when) you are eventually let go you will - obviously - blame yourself. And people who blame themselves for being laid off are usually the ones who never work again ("no one wants me. I'm damaged goods, I'm a screw up").

[Finance Dave]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BunsGettingFirm Dave, I think you'll find that this board is filled with people with graduate degrees and professional certifications of the highest difficulty. Even so, most of us have seen enough to know that competency is necessary but not sufficient to ensure continued employment. You may be right in that there is some rhyme and reason to who gets fired. That may actually be a good thing because it shows that the universe does have some rules. However, I have seen plenty of FOBs (friends of the boss) do little, strut around, create unnecessary and counterproductive chaos, and still remain employed. Trust me, no matter how good you are or how many black belts you have (in Six Sigma or in one of the martial arts), you cross one of the FOBs even if unintentionally, you're done.

I'm not denying it happens, only saying I've not seen the things you mention. There are some checks and balances. For example, it costs about $100,000 to "replace" an employee. Smart companies don't like to let go of people without good reason. Granted, if the company is small, it may be one person (or a small group of cronies) making the decision, and they may do as you mentioned above.

BTW, the $100,000 is a number used by our corporate HR group in reference to manager level Finance people within my firm. This number is well documented FOR OUR COMPANY (it may differ for yours).

[Texas Proud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finance Dave I've worked for my company for 20 years, and I've never once said "Gee, that guy was a great employee and they fired him". More likely I've said things like "I'm glad they got rid of him, he was lazy and always trying to push work onto others, never fixed any problems, and didn't have any initiative." Dave

I have not worked for many companies, but the last one (which laid me off) was much different than what your describe... There were many times that we were wondering why someone good was laid off and the slacker was not... I saw it when the company was only 30,000 employees and even more so when it was 170,000...

As an example... we had a very competent crew where we were located... but then another merger and a lot of people scrambling for jobs... and the winners in our area were the acquired company.... well, even after things settle down, my boss was demoted a couple of times... this was after they had asked him to go head up the Europe and Asia region (he was doing the west US...)... so, he was good enough to cover most of the world, but not to keep the West...

They got rid of me and two others because we were not sitting in 'corporate'... and the new boss did not like the people who had a lot of experience that would challenge her decisions... she wanted robots just out of college who thought she was brilliant...

Now, if they had said I was paid to high for the position it would have been another story... but my skill level was such that I could have been doing the job three levels up (and most of my peers kept asking why he was doing the job and not me... again, not sitting in corp hurts)...

But I am fine... work for a small company now and don't have to put up with the people who don't want to make decisions and just exist... and get the huge paycheck...

[Milton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texas Proud the people who don't want to make decisions and just exist... and get the huge paycheck.

How do I get one of those jobs?

[TickTock]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texas Proud They got rid of me and two others because we were not sitting in 'corporate'... and the new boss did not like the people who had a lot of experience that would challenge her decisions... she wanted robots just out of college who thought she was brilliant.

When competence hurts instead of helps....